WCMA Road Race Classing Review

[Spec Volcanic]

 EI saying the Seat regs are going to change.

This was not stated. It was merely a comparison between current and NASA SM regs...
And in fact, on our boards, I even said this will only be a concern if the rules are adopted too. No mention was made of that happening.

Please don't put words in our mouths.

Darin W.
Winnipeg Sports Car Club President

And this is what then Darrin?

Posted Today, 01:49 PM
I believe that WCMA utilizes the same seat requirement (FIA) with the exception of the Halo.
 
In NASA, All cars excl formula, require a Halo or right side net (CCR 15.17.9). This would come into play if WCMA accepts the NASA safety rules as well.
 
I don't think that is reasonable to ask all to run out and buy new seats and nets, however, I've been fooled before.

Like This
Darin W. - Club President
1994 Honda Civic - STU #17
1992 Toyota Tercel Turbo - Ice Racer #99x

"...he who lines up in pit row with me today is my brother, be he ne'er so vile...once more unto the breached engine block, or load up the tow truck with our oil-splattered dead!" - King Henry (or what he would have said if he were a racer! R&T)

[84TurboSupra]

That post is exactly what I said. Its a reply to another post on our forum...

A SM class member mentioned the difference in regs.

second line in my post says "This would come into play if WCMA accepts the NASA safety rules as well"

Did I say somewhere there that you were? NO! Does the info we got previously say something different? No.

I posted our racers concerns, our racers feel they are valid.

[Spec Volcanic]

That post is exactly what I said. Its a reply to another post on our forum...

A SM class member mentioned the difference in regs.

second line in my post says "This would come into play if WCMA accepts the NASA safety rules as well"

Did I say somewhere there that you were? NO! Does the info we got previously say something different? No.

I posted our racers concerns, our racers feel they are valid.

Many will read that has it is something that is part of the discussion... which it is not.... same with changes to SM regs....
you also add "I've been fooled before."... so it is not like you are saying that is not going to happen.

We need to be clear CCR's are not being discussed.

The concerns are valid however some of them members need not  be concerned about  and can be quickly addressed, as there are not being affected but the recommendation, like, changes to SM and Halo sits...

[84TurboSupra]

I have noted the possible concern and have modified my post to remove the confusion of whomever i haven't talked to off the boards may have regarding the implication that WCMA may be inserting all or part of the NASA CCR into its current list of safety regulations.

"I have been fooled before refers" to a previous concern that WSCC had that was brushed off as a non issue without second thought.
That will not be discussed here but feel free to talk to me next Saturday and I will gladly have an informal discussion about this and other matters.

I'm not interested in turning this into a pissing contest.

Darin

[Spec Volcanic]

I have noted the possible concern and have modified my post to remove the confusion of whomever i haven't talked to off the boards may have regarding the implication that WCMA may be inserting all or part of the NASA CCR into its current list of safety regulations.

"I have been fooled before refers" to a previous concern that WSCC had that was brushed off as a non issue without second thought.
That will not be discussed here but feel free to talk to me next Saturday and I will gladly have an informal discussion about this and other matters.

I'm not interested in turning this into a pissing contest.

Darin

Thank you Darin, I look forward to talking with you more on Saturday

[Scott14]

I've been holding back on this but thought I better put a few thoughts together before this issue hits the AGM.
I have Jed's job in Winnipeg and race at Gimli although like many I'm racing less for financial reasons.  Oh well.

I'm trying to figure out how this change, which I have favored up to now, will effect our entries and racing at Gimli. This may sound kind of foolish but we are pretty small.  A total of 98 entries last year over 5 weekends, 63 with fenders.  This total entry was spread over only 22 racers who entered one or more races in closed wheel classes so that's an average of just over 12 per weekend.  They only came in 6 classes, 2 of which were small (1 and 2 cars in SM and IT1) making up 5 entries altogether.  Vintage gave us 12 entries spread across 4 cars.  IT3 was the big one with 7 racers contributing 30 entries over the 5 events.   STU was next with 11 entries from 5 cars.  STO only had 3 cars who together made 5 entries.  So the interesting racing was among the STU and IT3 cars with some overlap at the back of the STU pack.

It occurs to me that no matter what class you put these cars in they're still going to be racing with one another in roughly the same position on the track.  If they get broken up into different classes that just means I need to get more trophies at the end of the year. 

There is not a lot of enthusiasm for the change here and we get kind of feeling like the tag end member of the family as there are a lot more votes in Alberta, especially when the AGM is there, as it must be most of the time.

I can't afford to lose racers over this.  I have a lot of part time racers now and the numbers won't go up although we've done a great job of enticing newcomers in and mentoring them along.  I'd like to find a way of implementing this that doesn't have anybody walking off in a funk because of the added cost of getting their car to comply.  Perhaps we ought to see where a car laps in the field before we pin down its class too firmly. 

Have fun at the AGM and good luck with this.

Scott McDonald

[84TurboSupra]

It occurs to me that no matter what class you put these cars in they're still going to be racing with one another in roughly the same position on the track.  If they get broken up into different classes that just means I need to get more trophies at the end of the year.

We have 7 or 8 Honda's that run together in IT3. They care about championship points and are energized by the competition...the spirit of racing.
Bringing in the NASA classing breaks these cars up into 3 different classes, one class having but one car. This is the largest concern within this specific group of racers that has been discussed at length, off forums. They do not wish to be split.

This is why there is a strong desire for Honda Challenge classes, specifically H4, at WSCC.

Darin
Winnipeg Sports Car Club President

[Spec Volcanic]

It occurs to me that no matter what class you put these cars in they're still going to be racing with one another in roughly the same position on the track.  If they get broken up into different classes that just means I need to get more trophies at the end of the year.

We have 7 or 8 Honda's that run together in IT3. They care about championship points and are energized by the competition...the spirit of racing.
Bringing in the NASA classing breaks these cars up into 3 different classes, one class having but one car. This is the largest concern within this specific group of racers that has been discussed at length, off forums. They do not wish to be split.

This is why there is a strong desire for Honda Challenge classes, specifically H4, at WSCC.

Darin
Winnipeg Sports Car Club President

Darin,
I'm very surprised to hear that you think these cars will end up in 3 classes the PT structure is very good and classing similar cars together, I have classed the IT3 civics and crxs and they are all comfortably in PTE, please email Doug and I the details on it3 cars that will not be in PTE.
Gary

[Spec Volcanic]

Scott,
I think you have made some very sound points, we will work with to ensure that no one is turned away, it sounds like that means finding a solution for awd cars in Winnipeg, and maybe a few other things that turn up. But all these issues can be addressed.
Gary

[10cc]

Spec, you might want to do a spell/grammar check on these posts...

[84TurboSupra]

Darin,
I'm very surprised to hear that you think these cars will end up in 3 classes the PT structure is very good and classing similar cars together, I have classed the IT3 civics and crxs and they are all comfortably in PTE, please email Doug and I the details on it3 cars that will not be in PTE.
Gary

We have proposed a solution that seems to be getting ignored...HC
WSCC may be more in favor of the NASA structure if this was considered as it solves a few of our larger issues.

I would imagine some of our fellow competitors throughout our region (SK and AB) would like it too.

Darin
Winnipeg Sports Car Club President

[Spec Volcanic]

your HC suggestion is not being ignored, in fact you can see in the last recommendation there is a process for getting it and any other classes added, this is an addition / clarification based member feed back.

However HC is not a solutions for a core classing structure as it excludes any car not manufactured by Honda... and the are a few non Hondas out there.

A core structure is required so we can support all makes and models as spec and mark classes come and go

Again please email us the details are the it3 cars you don't think this works for.

[84TurboSupra]

Again please email us the details are the it3 cars you don't think this works for.

You'll have to wait until after the AGM. I'm currently not in a position to do so right now.

[Chrisw]

So from what I hear we are making the switch to NASA rules...? I wasn't able to make the meeting but I assume it will take quite a while to get these new rules out. Anyone have any light at all they can shed on it?

[Spec Volcanic]

So from what I hear we are making the switch to NASA rules...? I wasn't able to make the meeting but I assume it will take quite a while to get these new rules out. Anyone have any light at all they can shed on it?

On the recommendation to replace the IT, ST, and GT with class rules from or similar to NASA’s Performance Touring and Super Touring.

Implementation for 2016 to allow competitors time to adjust to where they want to compete.

Of the active licenced competitors who participated in the vote. 74% were in favour of the recommendation.

Next steps are approaching NASA and working out some details